by Major General Scales(Marine Corp., Ret.), the U.S. military’s Achillesheel is knowledge of the enemy, and technology isno replacement for understanding the enemy’smind. This extends to understanding civilians, aswell, since winning their “hearts and minds” orinfluencing theirattitudes and psychological states

will play an important role in the wars we canexpect over the coming decades. Influence is a keyaspect of information operations

(IO), where thegoal is to affect enemy and other decision makerstoachieve specific objectives.

Also, the purpose ofPSYOP as a component of IO is to influence theattitudes and behavior of foreign governments,organizations, groups, and individuals.Furthermore, past research has identifiedthecharacterization of target audiences as one of themost critical and challenging aspects of IO

(Sieck,Stevens, & Shafer, 2004).

An inherent challengein understandingforeign target audiencesrests in gathering,analyzing, and representing the relevant culturalconcepts,beliefs,

and values that drive decisions

inthose populations. In this paper, we presentCultural Network Analysis

(CNA) as a broadapproach that aids in providing the most relevantcognitive aspects of cultural groups for decisioninfluence. CNA comprises

a collection ofmethodologies for eliciting, analyzing, andrepresenting the beliefs, values, and cognitiveconcepts that are shared by members of culturalgroups

(Sieck & Rasmussen, 2007). This paper willprovide a detailed description of CNA as well as adiscussion of how CNA can be applied to supportchallenges

in characterizing target

audiences.

Culture as

SharedKnowledge

Within cognitive anthropology, culture istypically defined as involving shared knowledge(D’Andrade, 1995). One specific theoreticalapproach to culture that characterizes culture interms of knowledge is the epidemiological view.Here,“Epidemiology” is used in the general senseof describing and explaining the distributions of anyproperty within a population.Culturalepidemiology regards culture in terms of the ideasthat are widely distributed throughout

a population(Sperber, 1996).

The emphasis on “ideas” or content knowledgeis consistent with work in cognitive field researchand naturalistic decision making that hasconsistently found experiences and mental modelsto have a primary

influence on real-world decisionmaking. The research from this community clearlyidentifies the contents of cognition, as opposed tomicrolevel cognitive processesoften studied inlaboratory experiments

(such as working memory),as the major driving force of decisions.

CNA leverages what has been learned aboutmental models from cognitive field researchinorder to more concretely define the kinds of ideasand their interrelationships that matter most inhuman decision processes.

example,considerintermarriage between U. S. military personnel andIraqis. Intermarriage has been taken as one visibleindicator of the extent to which we are winning the

Proceedings of Phoenix Challenge 2008

2

hearts and minds campaign. Several reasons havebeen cited for why so few U. S. personnel havetaken home Iraqi spouses, as compared with warspast.One potential reason has to do with thecultural differences in how Americans and Iraqisthink about romantic relationships. We canappreciate the differences bydeveloping an explicitmodel of Iraqi romantic relationships.

A mentalmodel of romantic relationships

contains a person’s concepts as well as theirunderstanding of the causal relationships betweenconcepts, i.e. the antecedents and consequences ofromantic activities and their outcomes. This mentalmodel influences the individual’s expectations forhow romantic relationships should unfold andprovides a framework for selecting behaviors andgoals within romantic situations. For example,individuals may hold the idea that a date is a socialengagement to go out alone with another person,usually with romantic intentions. Their minds mayalso be inhabited by the idea that dates should beavoided at any cost. As an example, considerFigure 1, a pictorial representation that mightdescribe an

Iraqi’s mental model of romanticrelationship pathways. The set of ideas representedin Figure 1 were extracted from a single newspaperarticle

onArab-Americans, and so it should betreated as largely notional for illustrative purposes(MacFarquhar, 2006). Figure 1 depicts a number ofideas using circles, lines, and color.

These ideasinclude simple concepts such as dating andmarriage, represented as circles. It also includescausal ideas such as that dating decreases oneschances of marriage, and of staying on an IslamicPath. These are represented as lines in the figure,with +/-

indicating the direction of the causalrelation. Finally, Figure 1 portrays ideas of desiredstates or value using color, as well as alogical flowacross desired states. Staying on the Islamic path isa good thing, something one should do. Finding amarital partner is likewise valued.

Since dating increases the risk that one will betoppled off of the Islamic path, as well as hamperingones chances of getting married, it should beavoided. Hence, holding this mental model is likelyto have fairly strong consequences for how a personwill decide and act.

As implied by the name, mental models resideinside the heads of individuals. However, whenpeople engage in activities such as speaking,writing, drawing, and modifying their environmentin any way, their mental models leave observabletraces in the formof physical artifacts andrepresentations. Figure 1

is one example of anexternal trace of a mental model, just as was thearticle from which it was derived. Whenexternalized traces are encountered by another

Proceedings of Phoenix Challenge 2008

3

person, that person’s mind produces thoughtsthatare similar to the originating mental models, at leastto some extent. While looking over Figure 1, youprobably entertained some thoughts that weresomewhat like those of the people quoted in thearticle. On a broader scale, people who come intocontact with similar traces can thus develop mentalmodels that resemble one another. Mental modelscan spread widely throughout a population,becoming“cultural” in the sense of beingshared bymany of its members. They can also endure withinthe population for very long periods of time.

At this point, it is useful to summarize anddefine a few related terms. First, the termculture

refers to mental models, and other contents of themind, that are shared by members of a populationover a period of time.

It also includes the resultingbehaviors and other traces that foster prolongedsurvival of the shared ideas by providing “habitats”for them.

Cultural group

refers to a self-identified groupof people that constitute the population of interest.Traditionally, members of cultural groups wereconnected in many different spheres, includingbeing neighbors, engaging in the same work, andparticipating in the same social and religiousactivities. High overlap in experiences like those,clearly leads to shared ideas within a large numberof domains. More and more, people often identifywith an increasingly wide assortment of groups thatvary considerably in aspects such as purpose, size,and cohesion. Modern cultural groups may be bestdefined and described using tools such as socialnetwork analysis.

The relevant cultural group for a study willdepend on thecultural domain, that is, the kind andtopic of knowledge of interest. Further, despite theredundancy, we sometimes usecultural knowledge

in place ofculture

to refer to the networks of mentalcontent for which there is some level ofconcordance among members in the cultural group.

Finally,cultural model

refers to an externalrepresentation of a culture that is constructed by aresearcher. A cultural model represents a consensusof the mental models for a particular cultural groupand domain. Hence, to the extent that its elementsare shared amongIraqis, Figure 1 serves as an Iraqi

cultural model in the domain of romanticrelationships.

Considering Figure 1 as the cultural model forsome target audience within Iraq gives us a preciseway of identifying cognitive vulnerabilities toinfluence cultural change. For example, supposemarriage is the most tangible perceived outcomethat is negatively

influenced by dating. We can thenaffect a change in the cultural model by targetingthespecific causal chain of beliefs

that dating willdecrease the chances of becoming married. Thiscould be

done by developing messages, includingconcrete images, that show Iraqi daughters datingand then getting married. This example alsohighlights the interrelation between causal beliefsand values. That is, changing the causalbeliefchainso that dating is seen as increasing thechances of marriage can also affect the relevantvalue (or attitude) towards dating.

Why Cultural Models?

Cultural models are formal descriptions of theknowledge possessed by members of particulargroups. Cultural models describe and representhow the world is understood by the members ofthese cultural groups. A key premise is that culturalknowledge comprises many networks of causally-interconnected ideas. These mental models becomeactivated within particular situations to drivethinking and decision making, and can change undersuitable conditions. Cultural models also seek toaccount for intracultural, as well as interculturalvariation in cultural knowledge, relationshipsbetween cultural knowledge and social networks,and cultural change.Cultural dynamics acrosssocial networks is especially useful for planning IO,and anticipatinginfluenceeffects.

Proceedings of Phoenix Challenge 2008

4

Figure 2: Cultural models represent a statistical consensus of the mental models for a cultural group.

Cultural Models vs. Cultural Dimensions

Cultural psychologists have oftenconceptualized culture in terms of lists of domaingeneral, stable traits, such as individualist-collectivist value orientations. The intent of thisprogram is to find a core set of dimensions forcharacterizing cultures that are believed by someresearchers to be important across a wide variety ofdomains. The promise of this approach is toprovide a priori, purely analytical predictions aboutcultural groups that are widely applicable to manyparticular problems. The enterprise is successful ifthe same small set of dimensions is predictiveacross a wide variety of cultural domains andgroups.

There is some evidence at this point that generalcultural dimensions may not be as useful as onemight expect to predict cognitive or social patternswithin the context of specific situations. Forexample, Sieck, Smith, & McHugh (2007) foundpatterns of a work team orientation dimension thatwere reversed from the predictions ofindividualism/collectivism. Tinsley and Brett

(2001) also did not find individualism/collectivismto be useful for predicting outcomes in US andChinese negotiations, but found thatspecific beliefsabout negotiation

were useful. Osland & Bird(2000) point to a number of cultural paradoxes thatarise in particular contexts from culturalcharacterization in terms of general valuedimensions.The a priori analytical promise of thedimensionsapproach is tempting, but so far the realvalue is at best unclear.

CULTURAL NETWORK ANALYSIS

Cultural Network Analysis (CNA) refers to acollection of methodologies for building culturalmodels. CNA includes methods to:



elicit and analyze the mental models of a sampleof individuals within the population

Proceedings of Phoenix Challenge 2008

5



measure the degree to which elements of themental models are shared across individuals anddevelop cultural models



represent the cultural model in accessible format

Figure 2 provides an abstract representation thatillustrates individuals’ mental models within acultural group, along with external cultural modelsthat have been extracted from the group

One goal of this phase is to develop an initialunderstanding of the concepts and characteristicsthat are culturally relevant within the domain. Asecond objective is to obtain initialgraphicalrepresentations of target audience members’ mentalmodels in formsthat closely match their

own

natural

representational structure. Qualitativeanalysis and representation at this stage yieldinsights that can be captured in initial culturalmodels.Often, qualitative analysis may be all thatis needed for applications.

are used to obtain systematic data that is moreamenable to statistical analysis. Statistical models

used by cognitive anthropologists,such as culturalconsensus theory, are

employed to assess thepatterns of agreement and derive statisticsdescribing the distribution ofconcepts, causalbeliefs, and values. Finally, formal representationsof the cultural models are constructed that illustratethe statistical and qualitative information indiagrams. Influence diagrams are an importantrepresentation format for cultural models. Formalrepresentation makes it possible to use culturalmodels in a variety of applied contexts.

Discovery Phase

Mental models are explanations about howthings work, and these explanations vary acrosscultures.Mental models entail culture-specificknowledge of the elementary concepts, as well ashow they are causally related. A

All of theparticipants were members of the Anishinaabecommunitywho had been previously diagnosedwith diabetes. The researchers ensured that thefollowing aspects of their experiences were coveredin the interview:



The cause of their illness



Why it started and when it did



The history of the illness



The kinds of effects it has



Possible and appropriate treatments for theillness

Participants were also encouraged to talk moregenerally about possible causes and ways of dealingwith diabetes, and to answer additional related

Proceedings of Phoenix Challenge 2008

6

questions that arose from the responses given.Based on the results, Garro constructed ahierarchically organized outline of the culturallyavailable understandings relevant to a culturalmodel

for sickness. The outline organized the mostcommon explanations of illness mentioned in theinterviews. First, the different types of sicknessesand sickness explanations were identified. Afterhaving inferred the major types of sicknesses thecauses, or perceived causes, were sorted intosickness categories. The level of detail andabstraction of the cause descriptions was dictated bythelevel at which

tease out clues to participant’s mental models. Forexample, Sieck, McHugh, & Smith (2006) elicitedincidents from participants in Lebanon and the USwho had participated in protests as a means to gainaccess toArabcrowd members’ understandings andexpectations of how crowds work, and the decisionsthat are made within crowds.

The difficulty inherent in getting informationfrom what people say, especially when they arechallenged with talking about very abstractconcepts, canalso be circumvented by attendingmore to the metaphors

theyuse tosay it.

Systematicanalysis of metaphor use can provide reliable accessto tacit knowledge. The metaphorical conceptsemployed by an individual can then be compared tothose employed by the group. Importantly, it ispossible to compare whether the metaphors used byone cultural group have the same or

differentimplications for action

(Quinn, 2005). If twocultural groups use metaphorical concepts that havedifferent implications for actions

to describe thesame domain, this entails that they conceptualizethe domain very differently.

For example, in cross-cultural studies of

AIDS

concepts, Wolf (1996) hascompared the war metaphors of the first world toconceptualize the AIDS virus (e.g., "combating thedisease" and "killer cells") with the metaphorsemployed in Malawi, where the virus isconceptualized using

metaphors of eating; the virus,conceived of as a worm, eats up human beings.

Consolidation Phase

One issue with purely qualitative

approaches tothe development of cultural models is the lack oftransparency or consistent guidelines in whatknowledge was deemed sufficiently shared toinclude in the model. Strauss and Quinn

state, “Atwhat point in the continuum of sharedness wedecide to call a given schema ‘cultural’ is simply amatter of taste,” (p 122). Computational approachesare required for consolidating the qualitativediscoveries about culturally shared mental models,and further analyzing and representing theirdistributions within and between populations.Cultural consensus theory andCultural MixtureModeling (CCM)

are two tools that can be usefullyemployed to meet those needs.

Cultural consensus theory is a collection offormal statistical models designed to assessconcordance in knowledge and beliefs among a setof respondents (Romney, Weller, & Batchelder,1986). When a cultural consensus is found, itprovides the consensual responses that indicateculturally shared knowledge and estimates of thestrength of consensus for those responses.Individuals will also vary in the extent to which

Proceedings of Phoenix Challenge 2008

7

their responses agree with the consensus, and thatvariation is captured explicitly for each individualunder the rubric of “cultural competence.” Culturalcompetence should notbe confused with expertise,but rather with the degree of concordance with theculturally sharedmodel.

Additional analyses can be performed tounderstandindividual variability

in culturalcompetence, for example, by relating thoseCCTmeasuresto social network analysis measures. Thetheory also enables the calculation of the minimumnumber of respondents needed toassess

the degreeof agreement. Assuming the data collection tapsinto reasonably well-shared cultural knowledge,then the number or respondents can be quite small,e.g., 10 or fewer respondents. This isan importantfeature for field use, which often aimsto drawconclusions from relatively small samples.

Cultural Mixture Modeling (CMM) is

a morerecently developed statistical technique

foridentifying

shared cultural beliefs (Mueller, Sieck &Veinott, 2007). CMM

uses model-based clusteringtechniques that allows one to determine multiple

distinct shared beliefsamong segmentswithin asampled population, as well as what those beliefsare.

It also provides

a

wider

number of metrics forassessing the cultural coherence of the segmentswithin the target audience, as well as the culturalcompetence of each member.

GraphicalRepresentation

We have developed

a default approach torepresentation for CNAso as to

accomplish thefollowing:

1.

Provide a standard pictorial form that showsthe concepts and causal linkages in a mannerthat can be readily digested byIOend users whoneed to routinely comprehend cultural models invaried domains

2.

Permit

a direct means of representing thestatistical distributions of cultural knowledge,rather than just the shared knowledge

3.

Yield

representations in a useful form fordevelopers ofagent-based simulation andanalysis

systems

Figure 1 presentsa standard

representationformat, illustrated with an initial Arab-Americancultural model of romantic relationships. It is aninfluence diagram. In it, each node-link-nodecombination represents influence, in the sense thatthe value of the concept at the beginningof anarrow affects the value of the concept at the arrow’spoint.

An influence diagram can present a relativelysimple and useful representation ofa cultural

modelof a domain that is tied to key judgments anddecisions thatare of importance for an IO

mission.The diagram represents the “culturally correct”concepts and linkages as determined by CCT

orCMM. Furthermore, CMM

results can be used topopulate the numerical probability values in themodel for developing a technically usefulrepresentation

of a cultural model. The result in thiscase is a summary of not only the shared influencelinks across the population, but rather the fulldistribution of beliefs, with probabilities indicatingthe consensus on any particular link. Althoughnumericalanalyses inform

the final result, the use ofinfluence diagrams to represent cultural models onlyrequires that individual members of the targetaudience

be able to convey the qualitativecomponents and directions of the influences in thediagram.

They donot have to report quantitativeinformation.

APPLICATIONS

Culture is made up of contagious ideas, that is,ideas that propogate effectively and durably within apopulation (Sperber, 1996). Two broad objectivesof research within this cultural epidemiologyviewpoint are to characterize the current distributionof mental models within the cultural group and tounderstand the dynamics of culture. Enhancedunderstanding of the current distribution of mental

Proceedings of Phoenix Challenge 2008

8

models within a culture can form a solid foundation

forshaping and effecting cultural

change.

Fundamental cultural research

seeks to addresswhy some ideas are more infectious than others, andto explain the most widely distributed and long-lasting ideas within a population. Research forpractical purposes

of IO

has a slightly differentfocus, as it is directed to influence decision making.From

a decision-making standpoint,

we recognizethat many ideas may be pervasive butinconsequential to decisions of practical interest.Hence,CNA

applied to IO begins by identifying the

critical judgments and decisions thatmeet IOobjectives. We then directCultural NetworkAnalysis to characterize

the networks of causally-interconnected ideas that are relevant to thosedecisions in order to answerthe questionsmostpertinent to the goals ofdesigning informationcampaigns:

can serve as a basis for inferring otherwiseimplicit goals and intentions, anddetermining whatmakes for culturallyrelevant messages.Culturalmodels

also allow for making predictionsconcerning the effectiveness of a message byproviding the opportunity to assess potentialunintended inferences that individuals with a certainknowledge structure might make. The explicitcontent knowledgeobtained usingCNAcan

alsoprovide a starting point for modeling and simulatingthe dynamics ofwithin a given culture.

This research was sponsored by the U.S. Army Research Laboratoryand the U.K. Ministry of Defence and was accomplished underAgreement Number W911NF-06-3-0001. The views and conclusionscontained in this document are those of the author(s) and should notbe interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressedor implied, of the U.S. Army Research Laboratory, the U.S.Government, the U.K. Ministry of Defence or the U.K. Government.The U.S.

and U.K. Governments are authorized to reproduce anddistribute reprints for Government purposes notwithstanding anycopyright notation hereon.